Evaluate the 44 Juvenile Thieves study (Bowlby, 1944) using the British Psychological Society (BPS) code of ethics and conduct (2009). (8)

Question 1

Bowlby was employed at the London Child Guidance Clinic where he gathered his sample of children to undertake his study.

Answer 1

The BPS requirement of confidentiality was maintained to some extent, although the location of the clinic and the thieves case history was published so they could have become identifiable.

Question 2

The 44 thieves had been referred to the clinic for stealing and were compared to a control group of 44 children also from the clinic.

Answer 2

The thieves and control group were required to undertake the clinical interventions due to their mental health and so parental consent to the investigation may not have been a completely free choice.

Question 3

42 of the thieves were determined to have abnormal characters and, without treatment, would be likely to continue criminality or develop mental health symptoms in later life.

Answer 3

Protection of the wellbeing of the thieves may have been superseded by the research aims and their psychopathology not fully treated to prevent future their criminality or mental health issues.

Question 4

Bowlby interviewed the juveniles himself and then interviewed their mothers separately, also getting reports from their schools.

Answer 4

The thieves had been referred to the clinic for their behaviour and may have felt pressured to take part in the interviews to show they would behave better in the future, so a right to withdraw could have been limited.